Additional file 1: of Should I sit or stand: likelihood of adherence to messages about reducing sitting time

How likelihood of adherence differs as a function of demographic, psychosocial and behavioural characteristics. (DOCX 18 kb

MOESM1 of Is sitting invisible? Exploring how people mentally represent sitting

Additional file 1: Table S1. Study 1: Perceived clarity of memories of autobiographical events

MOESM2 of Is sitting invisible? Exploring how people mentally represent sitting

Additional file 2: Table S2. Study 7: Description of stimuli

sj-sav-1-hpq-10.1177_13591053221137184 – for Does matching a personally tailored physical activity intervention to participants’ learning style improve intervention effectiveness and engagement?

sj-sav-1-hpq-10.1177_13591053221137184 for Does matching a personally tailored physical activity intervention to participants’ learning style improve intervention effectiveness and engagement? by Stephanie Alley, Ronald C Plotnikoff, Mitch J Duncan, Camille E Short, Kerry Mummery, Quyen G To, Stephanie Schoeppe, Amanda Rebar and Corneel Vandelanotte in Journal of Health Psychology</p

sj-pdf-2-hpq-10.1177_13591053221137184 – for Does matching a personally tailored physical activity intervention to participants’ learning style improve intervention effectiveness and engagement?

sj-pdf-2-hpq-10.1177_13591053221137184 for Does matching a personally tailored physical activity intervention to participants’ learning style improve intervention effectiveness and engagement? by Stephanie Alley, Ronald C Plotnikoff, Mitch J Duncan, Camille E Short, Kerry Mummery, Quyen G To, Stephanie Schoeppe, Amanda Rebar and Corneel Vandelanotte in Journal of Health Psychology</p

sj-sps-4-hpq-10.1177_13591053221137184 – for Does matching a personally tailored physical activity intervention to participants’ learning style improve intervention effectiveness and engagement?

sj-sps-4-hpq-10.1177_13591053221137184 for Does matching a personally tailored physical activity intervention to participants’ learning style improve intervention effectiveness and engagement? by Stephanie Alley, Ronald C Plotnikoff, Mitch J Duncan, Camille E Short, Kerry Mummery, Quyen G To, Stephanie Schoeppe, Amanda Rebar and Corneel Vandelanotte in Journal of Health Psychology</p

sj-spv-3-hpq-10.1177_13591053221137184 – for Does matching a personally tailored physical activity intervention to participants’ learning style improve intervention effectiveness and engagement?

sj-spv-3-hpq-10.1177_13591053221137184 for Does matching a personally tailored physical activity intervention to participants’ learning style improve intervention effectiveness and engagement? by Stephanie Alley, Ronald C Plotnikoff, Mitch J Duncan, Camille E Short, Kerry Mummery, Quyen G To, Stephanie Schoeppe, Amanda Rebar and Corneel Vandelanotte in Journal of Health Psychology</p

Exploring the prioritisation of sleep, diet, and physical activity as pillars of health: correlates and associations with health behaviours in Australian adults

Abstract:- Background: Chronic disease is the leading cause of death globally. Sleep, diet, and physical activity are modifiable health behaviours that are key for reducing the burden of chronic disease. These health behaviours are collectively termed ‘The 3 Pillars of Health’ and are critical for populations who are at risk of poor health. Shiftworkers are one such at-risk population. To target behavioural change it is critical to first understand which of these health behaviours Australians currently prioritise. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate how Australians (including shift workers) prioritise sleep, physical activity, and diet, and examine the associations with correlates of health behaviours. Methods: Two cohorts of Australian adults were sampled. A cohort of 1151 Australian adults (54% female, aged 18–65 years) including employed (in any work schedule), unemployed, studying, and retired completed a phone interview. A cohort of 533 Australian shiftwork-only adults (76% female, 18–72) completed an online survey. All participants were asked which health behaviour (sleep, physical activity, or diet) they prioritised in their own life. Behavioural correlates of sleep, diet, and physical activity (sleep duration, frequency of moderate to physical activity, healthy dietary behaviour), and years of shiftwork experience were also collected. Multinomial logistic regressions were used to investigate the association between the highest prioritised pillar of health and the behavioural correlates. Results: Diet was prioritised by the Australian adults (49%), whereas sleep was prioritised by the shiftwork-only sample (68%). Australian adults who prioritised diet were significantly more likely to report diets with less fast-food consumption (p<0.002) and more fruit consumption (p<0.002) compared to those that prioritised sleep. For the shiftwork-only sample, those with 16–30 years of shiftwork experience were significantly more likely to prioritise sleep compared to diet (p<0.05). However, prioritising sleep was not associated with meeting the sleep duration recommendations in the shiftwork-only sample.  Conclusions: Across two cohorts of Australians, prioritisation of health behaviour was only associated with actual behaviour for diet. This may reflect different motivations for prioritising different health behaviours, in addition to different capabilities to change different health behaviours. Future research should include longitudinal methodologies to understand how behaviour prioritisation changes over work- and life-span, and any associations with actual health behaviour.  </p

The SOS-framework (Systems of Sedentary behaviours): an international transdisciplinary consensus framework for the study of determinants, research priorities and policy on sedentary behaviour across the life course: a DEDIPAC-study

Background: Ecological models are currently the most used approaches to classify and conceptualise determinants of sedentary behaviour, but these approaches are limited in their ability to capture the complexity of and interplay between determinants. The aim of the project described here was to develop a transdisciplinary dynamic framework, grounded in a system-based approach, for research on determinants of sedentary behaviour across the life span and intervention and policy planning and evaluation. Methods: A comprehensive concept mapping approach was used to develop the Systems Of Sedentary behaviours (SOS) framework, involving four main phases: (1) preparation, (2) generation of statements, (3) structuring (sorting and ranking), and (4) analysis and interpretation. The first two phases were undertaken between December 2013 and February 2015 by the DEDIPAC KH team (DEterminants of DIet and Physical Activity Knowledge Hub). The last two phases were completed during a two-day consensus meeting in June 2015. Results: During the first phase, 550 factors regarding sedentary behaviour were listed across three age groups (i.e., youths, adults and older adults), which were reduced to a final list of 190 life course factors in phase 2 used during the consensus meeting. In total, 69 international delegates, seven invited experts and one concept mapping consultant attended the consensus meeting. The final framework obtained during that meeting consisted of six clusters of determinants: Physical Health and Wellbeing (71 % consensus), Social and Cultural Context (59 % consensus), Built and Natural Environment (65 % consensus), Psychology and Behaviour (80 % consensus), Politics and Economics (78 % consensus), and Institutional and Home Settings (78 % consensus). Conducting studies on Institutional Settings was ranked as the first research priority. The view that this framework captures a system-based map of determinants of sedentary behaviour was expressed by 89 % of the participants. Conclusion: Through an international transdisciplinary consensus process, the SOS framework was developed for the determinants of sedentary behaviour through the life course. Investigating the influence of Institutional and Home Settings was deemed to be the most important area of research to focus on at present and potentially the most modifiable. The SOS framework can be used as an important tool to prioritise future research and to develop policies to reduce sedentary time